456
PUBLIC
PECORD OFFICE
Reference
C.O.882/12
SIR,
134
Enclosure 2 in No. 55.
The Kachcheri, Jaffna, 30th March, 1932.
I HAVE the honour to forward a memorial addressed to His Excellency the Governor, signed by over 4,500 persons, requesting that a nomination day be fixed for the election of representatives of the four Jaffna Constituencies to the State Council. The Signatories include the recently elected Chairman, Vice-Chairman, and three members of the Urban District Council, two of the candidates who were coerced into withdrawing from the election last May, the chairman of the Rural Education District Committee, 11 out of the 26 unofficial chairmen of village committees, and 119 village committee members, 21 lawyers, including many leading practitioners, and seven notaries public, 14 ministers of religion representing the Roman Catholic, the Anglican, the Wesleyan, and the American Missionary bodies, the principal, vice-principal, or headmaster of the following schools:-Ramanathan College, Jaffna College, Manippai Hindu College, St. John's College, Kilner College, the Training School, Colombogam. Stanley School, the Training School, Ilavalai, the Kanderodai Institute, and 261 teachers.
2. I consider that the signatories both in numbers and influence represent a real and responsible desire to participate in the new Constitution, and I recommend that they be informed that a nomination date will be fixed. Possibly some alteration to the Order in Council will first have to be made, and it may be some time before a definite date can be fixed; but in view of the efforts that the boycotters are making to decry those who are prepared to co-operate I would suggest that His Excellency should at an early date inform the signatories that a nomination date will be fixed.
The Secretary to the Governor, Colombo.
C. 92986/32 [No. 4].
No. 56.
I am, &c.,
E. T. DYSON,
Government Agent, N.P
THE SECRETARY OF STATE to THE GOVERNOR.
(Sent 1.55 p.m., 8th June, 1932.)
TELEGRAM.
No. 123. CONFIDENTIAL. Your Confidential despatch of 12th April.* I should not feel justified in advising His Majesty to amend Order in Council as suggested. Despatch follows. Cunliffe-LISTER.
135
amend the Order in Council in the manner which you suggest raises an important question of principle, and I should not be justified in regarding it as merely a technical amendment of the Order in Council. If the suggested amendment were made, it seems to me that it would be possible in any future case in any Constituency or group of Constituencies for a party or for influential individual politicians to boycott an election, secure in the knowedge that if this political move failed they could rely on an election being arranged at a later date. On these lines I consider that Parliamentary Govern- ment would become impossible.
I have, &c.,
14233/33 [No. 5].
No. 58.
P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER.
THE GOVERNOR to THE SECRETARY OF STATE.
(Confidential.)
(Received 22nd May, 1933.)
[Answered by No. 59.]
SIR,
WITH reference to your Confidential despatch of the 9th June, 1932,* and
Ceylon, 30th April, 1933. previous correspondence on the subject of fixing a fresh nomination day for the election of representatives of the four Jaffna constituencies to the State Council, I have the honour to transmit to you herewith a further memorialt signed by several of the leading residents of the above constituencies in which they ask for reconsideration of the matter.
2. During my visit to Jaffna in February last the signatories to the memorial laid their case before me verbally at an interview which I granted to them for the purpose. I informed them of your decision in the matter and stated that I could hold out little hope of that decision being reversed but that I would be pleased to forward to you any further representations which they might wish to make in writing. I annex for your information a copy of the Press communiqué which was issued in connexion with the interview which aroused considerable interest.
I have, &c..
GRAEME THOMSON,
Governor.
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
A
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE
REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-
| PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
C. 92986/32 [No. 5].
No. 57.
THE SECRETARY OF STATE to THE GOVERNOR. [Answered by No. 58.]
(Confidential.)
SIR,
*
Downing Street, 9th June, 1932.
I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your Confidential despatch of the 12th April, transmitting a copy of a memorial addressed to you by over 4,500 inhabitants of the Jaffna Peninsula requesting that a nomination day he fixed for the election of representatives of the four Jaffna Constituencies to the State Council.
you
in 2. I have given the matter very careful consideration, but as I informed my telegram of the 8th Junet I regret that I have not felt justified in advising His Majesty to issue an Order amending the Ceylon (State Council) Order in Council in the manner suggested. I sympathize with the electors in the Constituencies affected who were misled at the time of the General Election and who are now desirous of partici- pating in the new Constitution. At the same time, I consider that the proposal to
* No. 55.
† No. 56.
Enclosure 2 in No. 58.
PRESS COMMUNIQUE.
King's House, Jaffna. 9th February, 1983.
His Excellency the Governor received a deputation consisting of fifty to sixty prominent residents of the Jaffna Peninsula at the King's House, Jaffna. at 3 p.m. on the 9th February.
Mr. Nevins Selvadurai, M.B.E., J.P., speaking on behalf of those present thanked His Excellency for receiving them and explained that they had come to urge strongly that a fresh nomination day be fixed to enable Jaffna to send representatives to the State Council. A preponderating majority of the inhabitants were in favour
of sending representatives to Council and there could be no doubt that if a nomina-` tion day were fixed elections would be held.
The deputation trusted that the Secretary of State would reconsider his decision in the matter.
His Excellency explained that it would be necessary to amend the Order in Council before a fresh nomination day could be fixed. In this connexion the Secretary of State had pointed out in reply to the previous representations which had been made that an important question of principle was involved and that he could not regard such an amendment of the Order in Council as a mere technical amendment. In the
* No. 57.
† Not printed.